PDS3 Standards: Individual Issue

---

Problem Summary: As labels become more complicated, we frequently encounter the case of multiple objects of the same basic type (IMAGE or TABLE, e.g.) being described in the same label. By convention we at SBN have always used unique identifiers for objects of similar type, which we formulate by prepending a descriptive modifier to the base type (as is done in the occasional SR example). Recent interaction with the Rosetta mission, however, has pointed out two major logical holes in the PDS label (and possibly ODL) standards: 1. I can find no requirement in the SR that object identifiers be unique within an ODL file. 2. I can find no statement in the SR that object identifiers in PDS labels must end, or even contain, the base object type. Similarly, there is not statement in the SR that requires that pointers and object with the same name should be mapped to each other based on their sequence in the file.

---

Working group: R. Joyner (lead) M. Cayanan, L. Huber, S. Hughes, T. King, A. Raugh

Originator: Anne Raugh

---

Standards Change Request:

Version	Date	Author(s)	Format	Note
1	2008-05-07	Todd King	DOC
PDF
2	2008-05-07	Todd King	DOC
PDF
3	2008-05-07	Todd King	DOC
DOC	With changes highlighted.
PDF
4	2008-05-07	Todd King	DOC
DOC	With changes highlighted.
PDF
5	2009-03-25	Todd King	DOC
PDF
6	2009-06-30	A. Raugh et al.	DOC	no markup
DOC	with markup
PDF	no markup
PDF	with markup
7	2009-07-15	E. Rye	DOC
PDF

---

Discussion:

• Discussion Blog
• Telecons: 2007-08-29 (HTML), 2007-09-12 (HTML), 2007-09-26 (WAV), 2007-10-17 (WAV), 2007-10-31 (HTML), 2007-11-14 (HTML), 2007-11-28 (HTML), 2008-01-09 (HTML), 2008-01-30 (HTML), 2008-02-13 (WAV), 2008-02-27 (HTML), 2008-03-19 (WAV), 2008-04-16 (WAV), 2008-05-07 (HTML), 2008-05-21 (HTML), 2008-06-04 (HTML), 2008-07-02 (HTML), 2008-07-16 (WAV), 2008-08-13 (HTML), 2008-09-10 (MP3), 2008-10-15 (HTML), 2008-11-12 (MP3), 2008-12-10 (HTML), 2009-01-14 (HTML), 2009-02-11 (MP3), 2009-03-11 (HTML), 2009-04-08 (), 2009-04-29 (HTML), 2009-05-27 (HTML), 2009-06-24 (HTML), 2009-07-15 (HTML), 2009-07-29 (HTML)

---

Supplementary Material:

---

Status:

Status	Task	ResponsibleParty	Response
SUBMITTED 2007-07-31	Submit issue.	ORIG	Issue submitted through online interface 07/31/07.
Form working group.	EN-SEORIG	E. Rye sent email to S. Hardman on 07/31/07 requesting that he assign a Dev team member to this SCR.

---

Votes:

A Tech Group vote to approve version 5 of this SCR, begun 06/18/09 and ended on 06/24/09, was inconclusive: 4-3-1-1 (yes-no-abstain-no vote). A newer version of this SCR is being developed.

Node	Representative	Version 5
ATM	no vote
EN	Ron Joyner	yes
GEO	Susan Slavney	yes
IMG	Patty Garcia	yes
NAIF	Boris Semenov	abstain
PPI	Todd King1	yes
RINGS	Mitch Gordon	no
RS	Dick Simpson	no
SBN	Anne Raugh	no
1This vote was submitted via the web interface several hours after the Standards Telecon vote.

Due to the inconclusive results of the above vote, the vote on whether or not to send the SCR to the MC was moot.

Node	Representative	Version 5
GEO	Susan Slavney	MC vote unwarranted
PPI	Todd King	MC vote unwarranted
RS	Dick Simpson	N/A

Version 7 of the SCR was approved by the Tech Group via web vote ending on 07/29/09 by a vote of 7-0 (yes-no).

Node	Representative	Version 7
ATM	Lyle Huber	yes
EN	Elizabeth D. Rye	yes
GEO	S. Slavney	yes
IMG	Patty Garcia	yes
NAIF	Boris Semenov	yes
PPI	Todd King	yes
RINGS	mitch	yes
RS	Dick Simpson	yes
SBN	A. Raugh	yes

Via web vote ending on 07/29/09, the Tech Group voted 7-2 (MC vote unwarranted-submit to MC for vote) to recommend against an MC vote on version 7 of this SCR.

Node	Representative	Version 7
ATM	Lyle Huber	submit to MC for vote
EN	Elizabeth D. Rye	MC vote unwarranted
GEO	S. Slavney	MC vote unwarranted
IMG	Patty Garcia	MC vote unwarranted
NAIF	Boris Semenov	MC vote unwarranted
PPI	Todd King	MC vote unwarranted
RINGS	mitch	MC vote unwarranted
RS	Dick Simpson	MC vote unwarranted
SBN	A. Raugh	submit to MC for vote